Apply for refusal to pay 1

Applicant: * * *, male, Han nationality, 5 1 year old, 1 May, 9601day, from * * * County, Shaanxi Province, with junior high school education, living in * * *, and being the father of the victim Lu Moumou.

Applicant: * * *, female, Han nationality, 5 1 year old, 1960, from * * * County, Shaanxi Province, with a junior high school education and the same address, is the mother of the victim Lu Moumou.

Protest request:

1. Request the Beijing Municipal People's Procuratorate to lodge a protest with the Beijing Higher People's Court on the case that the defendant Ruan Zhenbing refused to accept the criminal judgment of Beijing No.2 Intermediate People's Court (20xx).

2. Request that the defendant Ruan Zhenbing be sentenced to death and executed immediately.

3. The applicant is willing to give up all the compensation incidental to civil compensation.

Apply for protest 2

Applicant: * * *, male, Han nationality, 5 1 year old, 1 May, 9601day, from * * * County, Shaanxi Province, with junior high school education, living in * * *, and being the father of the victim Lu Moumou.

Applicant: * * *, female, Han nationality, 5 1 year old, 1960, from * * * County, Shaanxi Province, with a junior high school education and the same address, is the mother of the victim Lu Moumou.

Protest request:

1. Request the Beijing Municipal People's Procuratorate to lodge a protest with the Beijing Higher People's Court on the case that the defendant Ruan Zhenbing refused to accept the criminal judgment of Beijing No.2 Intermediate People's Court (20xx).

2. Request that the defendant Ruan Zhenbing be sentenced to immediate execution.

3. The applicant is willing to give up all the compensation incidental to civil compensation.

Reasons for applying for protest:

If the court of first instance sentences the death penalty, it shall not be executed immediately, and the reason for suspending execution for two years is untenable. The reason for this is the following：

First, the direct purpose of the death penalty in criminal law is: the crime is heinous, the means are cruel and the circumstances are bad. It is not enough to make the people angry without the death penalty. I ask everyone, including the judges of the first instance and the judges of the High Court, to take a look at the crimes committed by the defendants and their means and circumstances, and whether they are in line with the heinous crimes, cruel means and bad circumstances! ! !

Second, look at the specific circumstances of his heinous crime, cruel means and bad circumstances: according to the facts identified in the judgment of the first instance, it can be summarized as the following key words: holding a grudge because of quarreling, retaliating, stalking, entering the house, punching the victim's face, the victim struggling, trapping the victim's face with pliers, the victim didn't move much after hitting his head, and stabbing the victim's lower part (that is, vagina) with a broom. It can be seen that the defendant's purpose is that the victim not only wants to die, but also suffers more pain than death in the process of death. How vicious is his subjective malignancy? Does not sentence the death penalty conform to the legislative purpose of criminal law? Definitely not worthy! ! !

Third, the criminal pleaded guilty when a large amount of evidence could not be denied. How can such a confession be regarded as a mitigating circumstance?

Fourth, the criminal's family offered to compensate 30 thousand yuan in exchange for mitigating the punishment; However, the victim died so miserably and his family suffered so much that it is possible to ask the criminals for 30 thousand yuan. The applicant absolutely does not want, but only seeks the existence of conscience, affection, justice and fairness to comfort the spirit of heaven and the hearts of parents. Based on this, we give up any compensation to criminals and their families and don't want any money from them. We must sentence them to death immediately!

Applicant:

20xx65438+February 20th.

Apply for protest 3

If the court of first instance sentences the death penalty, it shall not be executed immediately, and the reason for suspending execution for two years is untenable. The reason for this is the following：

First, the direct purpose of the death penalty in criminal law is: the crime is heinous, the means are cruel and the circumstances are bad. It is not enough to make the people angry without the death penalty. I ask everyone, including the judges of the first instance and the judges of the High Court, to take a look at the crimes committed by the defendants and their means and circumstances, and whether they are in line with the heinous crimes, cruel means and bad circumstances!

Second, look at the specific circumstances of his heinous crime, cruel means and bad circumstances: according to the facts identified in the first-instance judgment, it can be summarized as the following key words: holding a grudge because of quarreling, retaliating, stalking, entering the house, punching the victim's face, struggling the victim, trapping the victim's face with pliers, immobilizing the victim's head, and stabbing the victim's lower part (that is, vagina) with a broom. It can be seen that the defendant's purpose is that the victim not only wants to die, but also suffers more pain than death in the process of death. How vicious is his subjective malignancy? Is it in line with the legislative purpose of criminal law not to sentence him to death immediately? Definitely not worthy!

Third, the criminal pleaded guilty when a large amount of evidence could not be denied. How can such a confession be regarded as a mitigating circumstance?

Fourth, the criminal's family offered compensation of 30,000 yuan in exchange for mitigating circumstances; However, the victim died so miserably and his family suffered so much that it is possible to ask the criminals for 30 thousand yuan. The applicant absolutely does not want, but only seeks the existence of conscience, affection, justice and fairness to comfort the spirit of heaven and the hearts of parents. Based on this, we give up any compensation to criminals and their families and don't want any money from them. We must sentence them to death immediately!

Applicant: * * *

20xx65438+February 20th.

Apply for protest 4

Applicant (defendant in the original trial): xxx, male, Han nationality, born on May 22nd, 1962, xxx, farmer, now living at No.47-1in Hedi District, Nanbai Village.

Respondent (plaintiff in the original trial): xxx, male, Han nationality,1born on March 26th, 973, a farmer in xxx village, now living at No.38-1in Xitou District, Nanbai Village.

Request for protest: Request the xx People's Procuratorate to lodge a protest against the civil judgment of the xx People's Court (20xx) Yu Min Zi Chu No.53, request the court to cancel the judgment and reject the plaintiff's claim.

Facts and reasons:

First, the basic facts of this case:

In 20xx, the applicant purchased 80 mu of barren land suitable for forest in Linangou village with the following ticket, and obtained the contracted management right of Linangou 16.5 mu of land by circulation, accounting for 96.5 mu. With the consent of the village Committee, the forestry department passed the acceptance. In 20xx, the Ministry of Forestry issued a forest right certificate to the applicant, indicating the scope and service life of the four districts. In 20xx, the land contractor adjacent to the applicant, that is, the respondent, changed the land use beyond the scope of business without the consent of the village Committee, turned the original cultivated land into forest land, and planted poplars in a small canal in the middle of the plot adjacent to the applicant. Due to the fast growth speed and well-developed root system of poplar, the normal growth of the applicant's walnut tree was seriously affected, resulting in the delayed fruiting of the tree, which seriously affected the applicant's economic benefits and caused great losses to the applicant. In order to safeguard the interests of the applicant and avoid the losses of the respondent, the applicant shall not hire an excavator to dig a small canal with a width of 80cm and a depth of about 1m in 20xx year1month, so as to cut off part of the root system of poplar and prevent the respondent's poplar from causing greater losses to the applicant.

Second, the court of first instance found the facts wrong.

1. It is wrong for the court of first instance to find that the applicant's canal digging behavior constitutes infringement.

Although the court of first instance raised the controversial focus of this case and whether the respondent's tree planting behavior was legal, it did not identify the key facts of this case when determining the facts of this case. Whether the defendant's tree planting behavior is legal or not is the key to this case.

If the tree planting behavior of the respondent is illegal, then the behavior taken by the applicant belongs to legitimate defense against the illegal behavior, and the applicant does not bear any legal responsibility.

If the respondent's tree planting behavior is legal, the applicant should bear legal responsibilities beyond the necessary limits, so the respondent's tree planting behavior is legal, which is one of the keys to this case, but the court of first instance did not recognize this key fact.

The fact is that when hearing this case, the evidence provided by the plaintiff is the certificate issued by the village Committee. This evidence can neither prove that the respondent has the right to manage the forest land nor prove that the applicant has the ownership of the forest land. Article 64 of the Civil Procedure Law stipulates that "the parties have the responsibility to provide evidence for their own claims." If the parties can't prove their claims, they will bear the risk of losing the case. In this case, the respondent did not provide any evidence to prove that the poplar belongs to his legal property. Naturally, if the tree does not belong to the respondent, the applicant has no right to claim his rights. And the evidence provided by the applicant at the trial bought the village Committee's shortage.

The agreement, land use certificate and forest right certificate can fully prove that the respondent's behavior belongs to infringement, and the photos provided by the applicant prove that the respondent's trees have caused considerable losses to the applicant, and the trenching adopted by the applicant belongs to self-defense and does not bear any legal responsibility.

3. It is wrong for the court of first instance to order the applicant to compensate the respondent for the loss of trees caused by the infringement of the applicant, which belongs to the error of applicable law.

The reason is: in this case, the applicant's behavior belongs to self-defense, and the way he took did not exceed the necessary limit and did not cause losses to the respondent. Therefore, according to the provisions of Article 128 of the General Principles of the Civil Law, the applicant does not bear any legal responsibility.

To sum up, the respondent turned the farmland into farmland without the consent of the village committee, knowing that the farmland could not be turned into woodland casually, and planted trees on the land that he did not have the right to use. Moreover, the trees planted directly harm the interests of others and cause damage to others. The court of first instance found that the facts and judgments were illegal, and drew lessons from Articles 179 and 187 of China's Civil Procedure Law.

Apply for protest 5

Applicant: Shandong Peace Management Co., Ltd. Address: No.56, Shanda Road, Lixia District, Jinan.

Legal Representative: Li Wei, board chairman.

Respondents:

Respondents:

Protest request

Request to lodge a protest in accordance with the law, cancel the civil judgment No.768 of Lixia District People's Court of Jinan City (20 13), and the people's court will retry and revise the judgment.

Facts and reasons

If the judgment procedure is illegal and the facts are found to be wrong, an application shall be filed in accordance with the provisions of 208th Article of the Civil Procedure Law, requesting the people's procuratorate to lodge a protest.

1. The service procedure of the court of first instance was illegal, and the summons was not actually served on the applicant, depriving the applicant of his litigation rights.

1. According to Article 85 of the Civil Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), the service of litigation documents shall be directly delivered to the addressee. If the addressee is a citizen, I will not give it to his adult family to sign for it; If the addressee is a legal person or other organization, it shall be signed by the legal representative of the legal person, the principal responsible person of other organizations or the responsible person of the legal person or organization; If the addressee has an agent ad litem, he may send it to his agent for signature; If the addressee appoints an agent to the people's court, it shall send it to the agent for signature. In this case, the applicant, as an enterprise legal person, was not directly served on the legal representative or agent by the court of first instance, nor was it served on the parties through other legal channels. The procedure was illegal and the applicant was deprived of the right to participate in the litigation.

2. It is wrong for the court of first instance to serve the so-called party Li * * as the employee of the applicant to prove that the summons has been legally served on the applicant. Article 59 of the Civil Procedure Law stipulates that "a power of attorney signed or sealed by the client must be submitted to the people's court when entrusting others to represent the litigation. The power of attorney must specify the entrusted matters and authority. " It can be seen that the authorization of the agent is not only the expression of the true meaning of the participants in the litigation, but also the authority of entrustment, which is a complete entrustment procedure. The court has the obligation to examine the authenticity and integrity of the entrustment procedure. Li * * Even employees of the company may not be qualified to be customers. What is the legal basis for being an employee or an agent ad litem? Can the principle of agency by estoppel also be applied to civil litigation activities?

Even if "agency by estoppel" can be applied, there is no reason to establish "agency by estoppel". The salary slip provided by Li * * has no seal and no definite date. How to prove who paid the salary? It cannot be proved that Li was working in the applicant's office when the case was filed. A business card can only prove that he has been in Changping Logistics before, not an employee of the applicant Shandong Peace Management Co., Ltd. In the case file of the court of first instance, a piece of evidence (post responsibility) provided by Li * * can just confirm the time of his resignation, and the filing time of this lawsuit is 2065438+May 2003. What qualifications does Li * * have as an agent of the applicant? It is inconceivable that the court of first instance should consider Li * * as an employee of the applicant under such obvious loopholes and insufficient evidence. Therefore, the service of the court of first instance was wrong, it was wrong, but it was not delivered to the applicant, so the case should be rejected and retried.

3. The signer of the summons, Li * *, was originally an employee of the Peace Hotel of the respondent Jia Qingying. After that, the property was subletted to four people to operate Changping Logistics, and Li * * stayed in Changping Logistics to continue his work. On the night of April 20th13rd, Changping Logistics was seized by Niu Li in the name of shareholder dispute, and the so-called "security company control" was used. No one is allowed in or out without their permission. All employees have left their jobs. How was the court service in May 20 13? It is really strange that a resigned employee can impersonate an applicant's employee to sign a subpoena. How did he learn about the lawsuit and sign for it? Normal people's thinking in litigation is to escape, rather than submitting a series of evidence such as salary slips, business cards and post responsibility letters to actively ask for participation in litigation.

To this end, I hope your hospital will focus on investigating Li * *, find out the truth, and hand over the offenders to the relevant authorities for handling!

Second, the original judgment found that the facts were wrong, and the actual executor of the lease contract was not the respondent Jiaqing, so he did not have the qualification of litigation subject.

In the original trial, the respondent Jiaqing provided the agreement signed on April 9, 201/KLOC-0, which proved that there was a lease contract relationship between Jiaqing and the respondent Niu Li, and the respondent Niu Li also provided a cooperation agreement, which proved that Jiaqing only fulfilled his duties, and the actual executor of the contract was Changping Logistics. However, in this case, the "agreement" between Jiaqing and the defendant Niu Li to initiate litigation is false and forged. Its formation time should be two years later, 20 13 years later. You can draw a conclusion through judicial expertise.

Even if there is a sublease contract between Jiaqing and Niu Li, in fact, the sublease contract signed by the two parties at the beginning only transferred Jiaqing's renovation fee of 1.2 million yuan, which has been fulfilled. Later, Changping Logistics or Niu Li, the actual lessee of the house, did not pay rent to Jiaqing, but paid rent directly to the owner after Jiaqing agreed, and the owner also accepted the rent of Changping Logistics, indicating that Changping and the owner formed a new lease contract. In this lawsuit, Niu Li provided rent receipts, utilities receipts, etc. It can also prove that the actual performance of the housing lease contract involved is the owner and Changping Logistics, and the landlord and Changping Logistics are the actual performance of the contract and the subject of the contract. The rights and obligations of a contract are only granted to the person who performs the contract. The previous agreement between Jiaqing and Niu Li has been fulfilled, and the fulfilled contract is no longer binding on both parties. Therefore, the respondent Jiaqing claimed that there was no factual and legal basis for liquidated damages, and he was not qualified as a litigation subject.

To sum up, the court of first instance made a judgment when it found that the facts were wrong, which harmed the interests of the applicant and should be corrected.

In order to safeguard the legal dignity and the legitimate rights and interests of the applicant, we hereby request the procuratorial organ to protest according to law.

I am here to convey

Ji 'nan People's Procuratorate

Authorized Agent: Dong xx, lawyer of Shandong Pengfei Law Firm.

Applicant: Shandong Peace Management Co., Ltd.

20xx March 27th

Apply for protest 6

Applicant: * * *, male, Han nationality, born on * * * * * village, Shandong Province, and now lives in * * * * * district.

Defendant: xxx

Address: xxx

Request: Withdraw the request

In the case of a general loan contract dispute between the applicant and the respondent, the civil ruling of Huimin County People's Court (20 1 1) ruled that the applicant refused to accept the ruling of first instance and appealed to Binzhou Intermediate People's Court. Binzhou Intermediate People's Court rejected the appeal and upheld the original judgment on the grounds that the repayment voucher provided by the applicant had no official seal. The applicant thinks that the evidence for ascertaining the facts is insufficient, and according to the provisions of Article 185 of the Civil Procedure Law, he applies and requests the people's procuratorate to lodge a protest.

First, the final ruling found that the factual evidence was insufficient.

The final ruling found that the repayment voucher provided by the applicant was not supported without the official seal. Due to the chaotic internal management of Cai Xia Carpet Group Co., Ltd. at that time, some documents were only signed by the payee, and the payee could testify in court as a witness, but the court made a final judgment without summoning witnesses to testify in court.

Therefore, it is unreasonable that the final ruling finds that the repayment voucher provided by the applicant cannot be supported without the official seal.

Second, the Court of Final Appeal wrongly applied the law.

The final ruling found that the signature of the applicant's wife on the statement had the same legal effect. According to Article 66 of the General Principles of Civil Law, an act without agency, beyond agency or after agency termination can only bear civil liability if it is ratified by the principal. Knowing that another person has committed a civil act in his own name without denying it is deemed as consent. The applicant denied his wife's signature in court, so the signature on the statement has no legal effect.

Therefore, the application of the law is wrong, so it is submitted to the procuratorate for protest.

This demonstration

* * * * Court

Applicant: * * *

Xxxx，xxxx